That's the kind of question I've been pondering for both the Moon and Mars. Apart from scientific and VERY wealthy tourist trips, I can't think of any economic arguments, nor have I ever read of any that made any sense at all.

On Earth, human-powered flight is possible for elite athletes, using cutting-edge technology. (Many people are not aware that a human has flown across the English Channel, in 1979 only 70 years after first aircraft flight!.)

On the moon, decently-fit people should be able to fly using racing-bicycle level technology, in an air-filled enclosed space of course. Like a sealed lava-tube for example. “Outdoor” flight would require only a simple compressed-gas jetpack or scooter. Imagine the guided recreational exploration trips that would be possible! And the scooter could be the guide!

1/6 gravity would be appealing for very rich to retire to. Only problem is it would be one way trip, returning to 1g after a year or more wouldn't be option for elderly. Very expensive for family to visit.

1/6 gravity would be appealing for very rich to retire to. Only problem is it would be one way trip, returning to 1g after a year or more wouldn't be option for elderly. Very expensive for family to visit.

I see it now.....

"Sunny Tubes Retirement Community. Low Gravity Living for the not quite so extraordinarily well off.*"

BFS. The worlds first Methane fueled FFORSC engined CFRP structured A380 sized aerospaceplane tail sitter capable of flying in Earth and Mars atmospheres. BFR. The worlds biggest Methane fueled FFORSC engined CFRP structured booster for BFS. First flight to Mars by end of 2022. Forward looking statements. T&C apply. Believe no one. Run your own numbers. So, you are going to Mars to start a better life? Picture it in your mind. Now say what it is out loud.

You have no idea. In his (somophoric) astronaut biography "Riding rockets" Mike Mullane noted how most astronauts have... boners in space, and suggested it might be used as a cure for erection problems.

Just make sure not carry a Harvey Weinstein with you in the tiny capsule... or keep any female astronaut away from the beast...

It seems like Scientific Research makes the strongest initial case for establishing infrastructure in support of a permanent manned presence on the Moon. Then going beyond that, there is the Backup Location for Humanity case, which could require data centers and even genetic repositories on the Moon. Then there's also the related Let's-Unite-Humanity-to-Pursue-Space case (a la ISS). Then there might be the niche specialty manufacturing case. Then there's the case for lunar tourism by the very wealthy, including retirement homes. Then there's entertainment and leisure (Grand Canyon on the Moon? Lunar Disneyland? Lunar Las Vegas?)

Perhaps there needs to be a roadmap for progression to these successive markets, including their associated cost thresholds which have to be attained for each market to become viable/sustainable.

Regarding leisure pastimes on the Moon - gee, I never thought of the flying thing, but it sounds cool. I was imagining that mountain hiking might be easier, especially if you were doing your hiking around the landscaped interior inside a large lunar lava tube. Imagine the extra years of mobility and vigor that the elderly might be able to enjoy, even while continuing to be in touch with family on Earth (Twitter feeds might only be lagged by a couple of seconds) For the elderly with less effective immune systems, they could be better isolated from flu/viral outbreaks on Earth.

Adapting professional athletics/sports to the lunar environment also sounds like a nifty idea. Lunar Cup Soccer as a bonus round to World Cup Soccer, etc, etc.

How do we incentivize going off-planet? How do we incentivize the needed investments into the infrastructure required?

My best idea has been, and remains, coming up with a fictional alien invasion, that requires human presence throughout the Solar System to fight off. It would have to be a massive collusion between a number of people in various positions of power across the world. But the CGI is now available to make it appear believable to the great unwashed masses.

Considering there are people who quake in terror each night awaiting the Zombie Apocalypse, I can't imagine it would be difficult to convince a large majority of the world's population of the fiction. And once the entire race feels it is threatened by extinction at the hands of godless alien scum, most all of the monies being spent on various armies will be able to be safely redirected to reducing the cost of access to the average Joe who wants to settle on the Moon, Mars or in the asteroids.

First, people (especially students) get inspired about the Moon by watching the first crew (and dog) doing a whole series of interesting accomplishments. In the next phase they become proud watching their national astronauts exploring the Moon.

With the high flight rate, ISRU propellant, ISRU of the bulky stuff, and levels of reusable launchers, the price comes down to where wealthy (but not filthy so) are able to afford to go.

The key is retirement and not figuring out what unobtanium there is. At a minimum, the quality of life shouldn't be bad (e.g. huddled in a can). Rather, large inflatables or structures from in-situ resources would be able to provide the space for amenities like beautiful architecture, an Olympic-sized swimming pool, golfing range, walking around a park, etc. The social dynamics (e.g. living in the most exclusive community) needs to have a Director including celebrity shows from Earth. Telepresence of settlers at their grandchildren's birth, graduation, & weddings will be necessary.

Finally, an equivalent community needs to exist on Earth where couples can experience it for themselves prior to committing that sort of money.

How about a Fort Knox on the Moon? Some place for countries to securely hold physical reserves that materially back their currency.

Just as the US Dollar is a de facto global reserve currency due to its use in the oil trade - perhaps in the coming space economy it won't really be oil, but rather water which is the vital substance that gets traded. So perhaps the Moon could become the site for a Fort Knox which maintains a physical reserve supply of water to be used in space.

It might be rather fitting that life-giving water which sustains us would be the physical reserve for our space-based economy. And the Moon might be the best place to store large quantities of it.

How about a Fort Knox on the Moon? Some place for countries to securely hold physical reserves that materially back their currency.

Just as the US Dollar is a de facto global reserve currency due to its use in the oil trade - perhaps in the coming space economy it won't really be oil, but rather water which is the vital substance that gets traded. So perhaps the Moon could become the site for a Fort Knox which maintains a physical reserve supply of water to be used in space.

It might be rather fitting that life-giving water which sustains us would be the physical reserve for our space-based economy. And the Moon might be the best place to store large quantities of it.

According to some theories based on LCROSS data there maybe large reserves of gold in poles. Your idea of gold bank reserve may make it viable to mine especially if it doesn't need returning to earth in near future.

According to some theories based on LCROSS data there maybe large reserves of gold in poles. Your idea of gold bank reserve may make it viable to mine especially if it doesn't need returning to earth in near future.

That's interesting - and the difficulty / challenge of moving anything off the Moon back to Earth would be a natural brake against volatility. It's hard for there to be a run on gold / whatever if it's all stuck up there on the Moon and hard to bring it back to Earth.

I've never found a rational reason. If low gravity gave you a few years more, due to reduced stressed on the body, as suggested a few decades ago by A.C Clarke, then perhaps the retirement community model is possible, and the rest follows from that. That's a big if, of course.

There can be plenty of non rational/emotional reasons though. Reason is just a small part of our lives.

I've never found a rational reason. If low gravity gave you a few years more, due to reduced stressed on the body, as suggested a few decades ago by A.C Clarke, then perhaps the retirement community model is possible, <snip>

OK, but IF that's the case (and this biomedical researcher thinks that's a big if), that's not going to be the only things required, is it? Who wants a few years more if it's just being stuck in a tube under 6 ft of regolith? These hypothetical OAPs are going to be coming out of the 1%, they will expect a certain standard of living. It's very much a catch-22, you need their money to build up a settlement, but you'll need to have built up the settlement to a certain standard before getting their money......

I've never found a rational reason. If low gravity gave you a few years more, due to reduced stressed on the body, as suggested a few decades ago by A.C Clarke, then perhaps the retirement community model is possible, <snip>

OK, but IF that's the case (and this biomedical researcher thinks that's a big if), that's not going to be the only things required, is it? Who wants a few years more if it's just being stuck in a tube under 6 ft of regolith? These hypothetical OAPs are going to be coming out of the 1%, they will expect a certain standard of living. It's very much a catch-22, you need their money to build up a settlement, but you'll need to have built up the settlement to a certain standard before getting their money......

Pretty much so. Imagine the impact on insurance companies, for example, if a number of customers started dying later. Also, take a look at the latest value of health costs in developed countries. People are willing to spend a lot of money to stay alive a little longer...There is no need for unpleasant tubes. Unpleasant tubes are not for the 1%. Imagine something like the joined images. Disney showed the way decades ago :-)

Just wanted to insert my hobby horse of a "robotic lunar colony"* NASA pays a fixed price to land commercially competed cargo on the moon every year.. say $0.25b.. not enough for HSF (yet).* NASA pays nothing for payloads. Instead it hands out cargo space as prizes to the most promising ISRU projects.* Universities and corporations do it for the prestige, and because the project advertises work they would be doing anyway.* The worth of projects is decided in a panel where everyone gets input, and where projects that enable others get upvoted.

I think this would chug away at tiny cost, drawing together diverse lobbies who have a vested interest in promoting the prestige of this project, and finding ways to draw in public interest from different vectors. It is totally different from the government deciding on the project and handing a huge lump of cash to a corporation that has no vested interest in whether the project is worthwhile.

What does this have to do with drawing people to the moon? It would make landing on the moon routine and therefore safe. There could be plenty of infrastructure in place even if they got stuck there. At a certain scale it would be worth sending a couple of engineers just to clean grit out of cogs... but more importantly you are exploring not only the moon but hundreds of different avenues inspired by diverse people around the globe seeking to close the business case for their pet idea. Unless robots replace people altogether, industrialising the moon means people in large numbers. This is not so much an engine to draw people to the moon as an engine to find the answer to draw people to the moon.